Which Civs should be added after PTW?

[XarXo]

Man, what I have to do for you understand that if USA is in the game is just because:

1.- Usa has a militar power never seen in history before
2.- They controlled the politics, cultures, and definitively, the life of millions and millions OUT of their country (by putting Saddams and Pinochets everywhere).
3.- They created and rule the world economical basis

And this is just 3!

Countries like Indonesia doesn't have the history background to help them to become civvish, or the exploding-in-history point that have USA.

Zulus and Iroquois are just for "full" empty areas, Celts represent specially a mix of Gauls and insular celts, or better, the original western europe inhabitants (germanics, franks and the others come from scandinavia, urals, siberia or sahara).

Europe was quite empty, why? Glaciation. Look that the biggest ancient cultures (olmecs, china, ganges, persia, babylon, sumeria, egypt, greeks...) emerged in the northern area of the equatorial line. We should ask WHY.

If we check the south, we find deserts, jungles, oceans... people gone to north while the nordic people gone further north for maintain their nomadic based on cold weather life.

Your civ sure will be here if Civ was more Call to Power.

This second game ended in teh first version at 3000 AC, and 2300 in Call to Power II, so including these new nations was possible and understandable.

Just time is what you need

BTW: I have an own civ, Crown of Aragon, with more than 1500 years of history, our language is spoken by more than 10 millions and we are quite rich, so... Why not us? Because I recognize that we are a civ, but not enough time an important one. That's all. My civ now is borning: Europe.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Well, perhaps Indonesia should not be added. It is, after all, a "newish" nation, probably in the first stage of Historial Development, or perhaps the Second. Still, the polynesians could be represented.

I don't wish to get in a snitty argument with you, but I still object to the presence of the Celts and the lack of more of the turkic peoples from central asia, more native americans, more african states (which are CERTAINLY old enough to be included, if that's a major criterion...), oceanic peoples, aborigonies, and the tamil peoples.

Of COURSE American should be included. But if a bunch of long-gone nomads are going to be in the name (not that they shouldn't be), I don't see why the world's most populous Muslim nation should be excluded.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
Well, perhaps Indonesia should not be added. It is, after all, a "newish" nation, probably in the first stage of Historial Development, or perhaps the Second. Still, the polynesians could be represented.

I don't wish to get in a snitty argument with you, but I still object to the presence of the Celts and the lack of more of the turkic peoples from central asia, more native americans, more african states (which are CERTAINLY old enough to be included, if that's a major criterion...), oceanic peoples, aborigonies, and the tamil peoples.

Of COURSE American should be included. But if a bunch of long-gone nomads are going to be in the name (not that they shouldn't be), I don't see why the world's most populous Muslim nation should be excluded.

hi ,

indonesia , ....

well we could let the nation be born out of some civs ( Firaxis this is really needed !!! ) or we could put the dutch up there , ..... the map does look a bit empty there , ....

aboriginals should be included , thats for sure

and maybe a special civ in the pacific ocean , ....

have a nice day

[Odin]

Many civilizations are hybrids. The Spain example was a good one. Spaniards are a mix of North African, Celtic, Bausque, Visigoth, and Arab culture. Rome was a hybrid of Etruscan (which were not Indo-European! ); The Latins, who were a group from central Europe; and Greek.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Yes, Odin, well put. Let's consider ALL the civs in the game:

America - a blend of many, perhaps dominated by the English, Germans and Irish

Germany - a blend of Scandanavians, Franks, Goths, Austrians, so many I couldn't name them all

France - Franks, Gauls, Germans, Normans, etc.

China - You could assume this means the Han Chinese, but modern China contains over 100 nationalities.

Japan - A mixture of Ainu and Chinese, with some other influences

Mongols - One of the many, many tranoxianic peoples... perhaps the most famous, but still one of many

Ottomans - One of the many turkic peoples.

Russia - Scandanavians, slavs, etc.

...Almost all the civs in Civ3 are hybrids, as are almost all ethnicities on the face of the planet at this point, even such ancient peoples as the Tamil and the Basque.

[Generalissimo]

You know, i was thinking if civ4 is going to look like the olympic games and not civ4,why not give an extra trait for the "true civs"(england, france,russia,germany,usa,rome,greece...)
it will solve the kind of problems that came up in the "america one nation under god" thread.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by Generalissimo
You know, i was thinking if civ4 is going to look like the olympic games and not civ4,why not give an extra trait for the "true civs"(england, france,russia,germany,usa,rome,greece...)
it will solve the kind of problems that came up in the "america one nation under god" thread.

Erk... "true civs"... that phrase makes me cautious... but I haven't read the "america one nation under god" thread, so I won't pass judgment on what you said... but I'd hope that some non-european descended civs might be considered "true" as well...

...but forgive me if I've taken your statement out of context.

[VJ]

Mali.

[Beren]

Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
...Almost all the civs in Civ3 are hybrids, as are almost all ethnicities on the face of the planet at this point, even such ancient peoples as the Tamil and the Basque.

You must not expect to be able to have a pure civ. There is always some intermixture and some divisions inside the civ.
But of course there are different degrees. One might well argue to cut away half of the civs and replace them with one Civ: the Europeans (Come on: basically the same culture)

[Generalissimo]

By "true civs" i refer to civs that truely dominated the world(england and france) or had a HUGE impact on the world and its future development(greece)
because as a history nerd the idea the that the russians or the british are being bullied by a tibetian or an aztec empire is quite disturbing

[VJ]

You must not expect to be able to have a pure civ. There is always some intermixture and some divisions inside the civ.
But of course there are different degrees. One might well argue to cut away half of the civs and replace them with one Civ: the Europeans (Come on: basically the same culture)

Mali.

By "true civs" i refer to civs that truely dominated the world(england and france) or had a HUGE impact on the world and its future development(greece)
because as a history nerd the idea the that the russians or the british are being bullied by a tibetian or an aztec empire is quite disturbing

Mali.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by Beren
But of course there are different degrees. One might well argue to cut away half of the civs and replace them with one Civ: the Europeans (Come on: basically the same culture)

I would have to agree with you there, but be careful what you say around here! I think we're in the minority...

(and in case any of you Europhiles are wondering, no, I am NOT Venezuelan... I just chose the flag... I am 100% English-Scottish-Welsh-Irish-Russian)

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by Generalissimo
By "true civs" i refer to civs that truely dominated the world(england and france) or had a HUGE impact on the world and its future development(greece)
because as a history nerd the idea the that the russians or the british are being bullied by a tibetian or an aztec empire is quite disturbing

Well, I'd have to agree with you there, too.

I hate it when the Zulu and Iroquois come to dominate my huge maps late in the game, or the freakin' CARTHAGINIANS!!!! Argh...

[Cruddy]

Wow, what a question... If you look at it culturally, I think the Dutch are the best candidates (Rembrandt, Van Gogh & co) with maybe a UU of yacht - faster version of the frigate.

If you look at it militarily, the Israelies are the shoo in candidates, although I think they'll get it because it'll boost sales...

Byzantium is just Rome with Orthodox Christian knobs on - can't see an obvious UU although I daresay the history buffs will laugh at me.

Personally I'm working on a new Civ that isn't featured in ANY of these posts - it's many months from completion so I'm not going to crow about it - as Nike say, "Just do it".

[history buffs]

Originally posted by Cruddy


Byzantium is just Rome with Orthodox Christian knobs on - can't see an obvious UU although I daresay the history buffs will laugh at me.

[sabrewolf]

HB
wow, you really set up this DL just for this post?

[Gangerolf]

cool

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

That would be a cool unit... the History Buff... it doesn't move, but it has a REALLY high defensive value...

[Fatalis2]

I'd say : Israel, Netherlands, Portugal, Incas, Ethiopians (or "Nubia"), Poland and Khmers.